the DNC will act in the best interests of the Party, which is to act in a way that helps the Party win in November

The Obama-controlled Party establishment desperately wants her out ASAP and Clinton has a solid argument for taking it to the convention.

If she will just hold her ground, they will be forced to seat all of her delegates (no penalties) and give her some space for an honest debate with the SDs on electability.

First, the link to a quick PDF. [List below modified by me to eliminate PDF format]

RULES COMMITTEE Chairs
Sunita Leeds
Mary Rose Oakar
David Walters
  [Here's a link to the DNC "very short bios" for the 3 chairs.

If they do not honor these votes, they can kiss their party goodbye. It won't happen overnight - as much as I would like to see that - but it will be complete after this GE. (Even if Obama ekes out a victory, it will be without key constituencies. More to the point, he will replace the party with his folks from top to bottom and most of them are following an individual not a policy.)

Here are the quickest ways for any government or organization to lose power :

1. Not deliver. (That can be forgiven if people feel part of the process (see no. 2).

2. Deny people the right to be part of the process. (Sometimes you can overcome that if you deliver (see no. 1));

3. Do both 1 and 2 at the same time (my prediction for November 2008);

The Puerto Rico primary is the next day, and I don't think that the rules committee is going to want to do anything that looks like a slap in the face to Clinton's Latin@ support.  

Hillary is ahead in the popular vote.  Remember what Pelosi said "the will of the people".

Hillary is ahead in electoral votes.  The ones it takes to win in November.

Hillary won most of the big states, again needed to win in November.

Obama ticked off FL and MI by blocking their votes, which Hillary won overwhelmingly. Say what you want, the fact is Hillary won FL and MI.

Obama ticked off TX voters by reversing Hillary's win in the primary with his corrupt caucuses. People don't like to be pushed, blocked, threatened, have documents stolen, etc. and forced out of caucuses unable to vote or have their vote overturned through corruption.

Buyers remorse is setting in.  People are realizing Obama is a lot of hot air with no record of accomplishments, very poor judgement based on the fact that it took him 20 years to figure out his preacher is a racist, anti-American adulterer, when it took Oprah a very short time.

And, based on his deals with indicted Rezko, his money laundering with other Chicago crooks.  And, his long-time friend and boss who help him launch his campaign, the unrepentant terrorist bomber, Ayers. The money men, Auchi, the Iraqi billionaire, the PLO people, and others.

And, his continual lying about Hillary, her programs, plans, and thoughts.  Lying about his stand on Iraq, past and present.  He didn't hear the preacher, then he did.  He "doesn't" take lobbyist money. He tells Canada don't listen to him, it's only political rhetoric, and on and on.

The superdelegates should realize that the popular vote represents the will of the people.  The electoral votes represent the chance of winning in November.

The pledged delegate system is totally inequitable. The following tries to explain how delegates are based on square footage rather than population, which is absurd.

The delegate-to-voter ratios among the states are anything but equal, even if we remove the superdelegates from the calculation. There is a rather striking violation of political equality. Voters in large states are underrepresented by delegate apportionment. In fact, among states that have held primaries to this point, those we might consider large (defined as having a population of at least four million) have a pledged delegate-to-voter ratio of 1 to 11,901 while in small states (those with a population of less than four million) the ratio is 1 to 8,753. It turns out, then, that even if there were no superdelegates (and no caucuses), the process of selecting delegates via primaries would distort the principle of one-person, one-vote.

Raul Martinez, Clinton supporter and former Hialeah mayor who is currently running against Republican Lincoln Diaz-Balart for a House seat

Janee Murphy, Obama supporter and DNC member

Speculation is rife that it may be John Edwards.

Why is that on-topic, you ask?

Because his endorsement(if and when it happens) could affect the delegate race, especially with regard to Florida and Michigan.  Edwards picked up 13 pledged delegates in Florida, and if he endorsed Obama, Obama would be much more likely to be successful in arguing to have the 55 uncommitted Michigan delegates assigned to him.  Obama could have a net potential pickup of up to 87 delegates from a single endorsement.

I say this because the problem is not Hilary's or Obama's.  the problem is the democratic leaders are just so good sometimes at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory...whoever the candidate is.  

By the way, the republicans just said the states that violated their rules could only seat half...no screaming, no headlines...which means even if the gop nomination had been close, there probably would not have been a big problem with the rogue states.  

Michigan and Florida broke the rules and have suffered consequences for that (I think rightfully so).  Originally, when Dean and the DNC decided to punish the two states by stripping them of their delegates I didn't hear Hillary Clinton's campaign complain.  

Can anyone find a Clinton campaign complaint about Michigan and Florida BEFORE she started losing the nomination?  Back when she was the inevitable candidate the states were irrelevant.  

To imply that there is some sort of Obama/DNC conspiracy is laughable.  Come on.  He's barely winning as it is.  Clearly the majority of the Democratic Party establishment has only recently been partial to Obama.  Two months ago Hillary Clinton had 100 more party leaders  (superdelegates) supporting her than Obama did.

I've donated to Clinton's campaign and volunteered for it as well.  I am a fan.  But she is obviously losing and that's not Obama's fault.  It's not Michigan and Florida's fault or the DNC's fault or a supposedly biased medias fault.  

It's because her strategy didn't work and her message has only begun to really resonate recently.  Maybe too little too late.  On May 31 I hope they seat half of MI and FL delegation just like the Republicans did in the first place.  Then, if Hillary can't magically pull out this nomination, I hope she enthusiastically supports Barack.